Toothbrushes are typically manufactured using an injection molding process. Such an injection molding process is characterized by providing a mold in the shape of the toothbrush and injecting molten plastic through a hot channel nozzle into the mold. The toothbrush is then cooled and ejected from the mold. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,845,358 shows such a toothbrush made by injection molding. One of the limitations of the conventional injection molding processes is that large diameter handles, and especially large handles with a substantial variation in cross sectional area where cross sectional area both increases and decreases along the length or major axis of the brush, cannot be produced in an efficient manner, due to the cost of increased material and lengthened cooling times, resulting from the increased mass of material used.
Toothbrushes with increased handle diameters provide substantial advantages, for instance they can provide increased gripping area for children increasing the ability of children to handle and use toothbrushes; also people with disabilities such as arthritis sometimes have difficulty in handling toothbrushes due to difficulty in flexing the joints in their hands. Such difficulties are considerably relieved by means of toothbrushes having increased handle diameters. Additionally, the larger cross section handles on the toothbrushes are better for the user from an ergonomic point of view. Variations in cross sectional area, including both larger and smaller cross sectional areas, along the length or major axis of the brush assists the user in the grip and handling of the brush during use, when it must be rapidly moved while it may also be wet or slippery.
In an attempt to overcome the difficulties associated with the use of injection molding to produce toothbrush handles having increased diameters, it has been suggested to produce toothbrush handles having a hollow body. For example, EP 0 668 140 or EP 0 721 832 disclose the use of air assist or gas assist technology to make toothbrushes having hollow, large cross-sectional handles. In the disclosed process, molten plastic is injected near the base of the toothbrush handle, wherein subsequently a hot needle is inserted into the molten plastic to blow gas into the molten plastic which is then expanded towards the walls of the injection mold. In a similar manner, U.S. Pat. No. 6,818,174 B2 suggests injecting a predetermined amount of molten plastic into the cavity to only partially fill the mold cavity and subsequently inject a gas through a gas injection port formed in the injection mold to force the molten plastic into contact with the walls of the mold cavity. CN102166064 discloses a toothbrush having a hollow handle and a method for producing such a toothbrush. When the molten plastic material is injected into the toothbrush handle die cavity of the brush handle, a blow hole is formed in the toothbrush handle, gas is blown into the center of the toothbrush handle through the blow hole, and the blow hole is sealed after the toothbrush handle is shaped. The toothbrush described here has a hollow handle and a solid head made through a gas-assisted injection molding process. The hollow handle made in this method reduces the amount of material used by 10˜50% as compared to a solid toothbrush handle. Such injection molding processes using additional air injection have substantial difficulty forming hollow handle bodies with substantially uniform wall thickness, and as such, the potential for optimization of a handle for maximum ergonomic function in minimum material weight and manufacturing efficiency is limited. A further drawback to such injection molding processes is the creation of a vent hole for the gas. The vent hole is formed at the interface of molten plastic and high-pressure gas (and not by mold steel) and thus cannot be made predictably or with high precision. A still further drawback of hollow-handled toothbrushes made using gas-assist injection molding relates to the application or installation of a second, third or subsequent material to the toothbrush by injection molding, or overmolding, where the over-molded material may, in the process of sealing the necessary gas vent, intrude substantially into the hollow void created in the first gas injection step, as there is nothing to stop it besides friction and the near-atmospheric pressure inside the void. Finally, gas-assist injection molding does not substantially reduce injection pressure or melt energy required to form a plastic article.
A conventional method to create toothbrush handles having increased cross sections, such as electromechanical toothbrush handles, is to manufacture discrete parts of the handle separately using injection molding, then to assemble these parts in either a separate non-injection molding step, or in a subsequent injection molding step whereby the discrete parts from the first step or steps are inserted into an injection mold first and one or more additional materials are injected around them, creating a hollow body from multiple parts. This manufacturing method still has the drawbacks of: requiring the complete melting of plastic, high pressures and associated equipment involved with injection molding, and in addition may have added labor expense associated with both in-mold and out-of-mold assembly of discretely-molded parts. The use of injection molding to create multiple discrete parts also has the disadvantage that each part must not contain any substantial undercut from which the mold core forming a concave surface of the injection-molded part could not be extracted from the part after molding. Further, mold cores must typically contain some mechanism to cool or remove heat, typically embodied as internal channel through which chilled water is forced, and would thus be difficult or impossible to make internal geometry for most manual toothbrushes which may have diameters of 10 mm and lengths beyond 100 mm. The lack of undercuts in discrete parts combined with the length and diameter of cores required to make non-undercut handle parts combined with the desire for multiple areas of variation in cross sectional area on a toothbrush handle would thus require any discretely-assembled handles to have multiple mating surfaces, which would preferably require seals to maintain barriers to moisture and debris under extensive and repeated use.
Electromechanical toothbrushes in particular are susceptible to problems of assembly, as they are necessarily hollow in order to include batteries, motors and associated electrical linkages and drive components which must be all placed inside with some degree of precision. To avoid the problems and expense of welding plastic parts together and multiple assembly steps of a sealed outer shell, it has been proposed to blow mold the handle for electromechanical toothbrushes. In the assembly of a blow molded electromechanical toothbrush it is necessary to leave the blow molded portion of the handle open in at least one end to accommodate the motor, batteries, and drive system components. In this process, the minimum diameter of at least one opening to the blow molded handle must exceed the smallest linear dimension of every component that will be inserted. Such a large opening would be a drawback in a non-electromechanical handle, which has no need to accommodate internal component entry, and would necessitate an overly-large second part or cap to prevent intrusion and collection of water, paste, saliva and other detritus of conventional use. Such an overly-large opening, if positioned near the head, would interfere substantially with ergonomic use of the brush. Additional constraints to the geometry on the inside surface of the cavity, for example to locate motors, housings, batteries, etc. which must be positioned inside accurately as to be rigidly fixed will also be detrimental to the overall blow molding process, as the majority of the inner cavity surface of a blow molded part cannot be defined directly by steel in the mold surfaces, and is instead defined indirectly by steel on the outer surface of the handle combined with the wall thickness of the parison, blowing pressure and stretch ratio of the final part to the original parison or preform thickness. Such constraints of these process variables will necessarily limit manufacturing efficiencies.
To accommodate activation of electrical components via a standard button or mechanical switch, at least some portion of a blow molded electromechanical toothbrush handle should be made thin enough to flex substantially under pressure of a finger or hand squeeze. Such a thin-walled structure or film-walled structure necessarily requires some strengthening mechanism to ensure durability and rigidity under use. An internal frame or cap, as described in WO 2004/077996 can be used to provide this necessary strengthening mechanism in an electromechanical toothbrush, but would be a drawback to a manual brush, which does not require additional components to function adequately, in extra expense, complexity and additional load-bearing parts. Further, due to the linear nature of the motor, power source, and drive shaft of electromechanical toothbrushes there are no or minimal variations to the cross-sectional area of the inner cavity; such that the inner cavity walls provide mechanical support to the internal components to reduce or eliminate unwanted movement or shifting.
An electromechanical toothbrush handle, made by blow molding or injection molding, is typically manufactured with an opening at either end: At a distal end there is typically an opening to accommodate the mechanical translation of power through a drive mechanism to the toothbrush head, and at a proximal end there is typically an opening to accommodate insertion of components during manufacturing and possibly also insertion or removal of the battery by the user. Such a second opening would be unnecessary for a manual toothbrush and would create drawbacks in the need for additional seals and mechanical fasteners. In some blow molding processes, the formation of openings at the distal and proximal ends of the molded part are intrinsic to the process and would benefit the formation of a double-open-end handle, but would not be necessary for a manual toothbrush handle.
There are several advantages to making toothbrush handles lighter in weight overall, regardless of cross section or changes to the size. Lighter handles could provide a more tactile feedback of forces transmitted from the teeth through the bristles to the head to the handle to the hand during brushing. Lighter toothbrush handles would also ship in bulk with greater efficiency from manufacturing centers to retail centers where they are purchased by users. To reduce weight while maintaining stiffness, some toothbrush handles are made from bamboo or balsa wood, however these materials have disadvantages in that they are not easily formable into complex three-dimensional shapes which can be comfortably gripped. Further, these materials are anisotropic, meaning they have an elastic modulus and yield strength or ultimate strength which varies with the direction which load is applied. Carbon-fiber composites and glass-filled injection-molded plastics are other common examples of anisotropic materials which could be used to make lighter and stronger toothbrushes. Articles made from these materials must therefore be formed with their strongest axis or ‘grain’ aligned substantially with the major axis of the article in order to resist fracture during the bending forces common to use. This creates an extra necessary step in the preparation of the material prior to forming or machining. This alignment of the grain also can present a specific disadvantage to woods in general in that the presentation of splinters of material is most likely to occur in the direction aligned to typical forces applied by the hand during brushing.
To make toothbrush and personal care articles lighter without relying on anisotropic materials such as woods, the articles could be made lighter through the use of non-homogeneous but isotropic materials, such as foamed plastics. Foamed plastics present an advantage in that they can offer a higher strength-to-weight ratio than solid plastics without regard to material orientation. The overall weight savings possible with foamed plastics may be limited however, as the bubbles inside the plastic which create the weight savings also create stress concentrations which will severely reduce strength in tension. While foamed plastics can provide substantial strength in compression (and are used for exactly this purpose in applications such as packing materials where weight is a critical issue) the weakness in tension severely affects bending strength and prevents uniformly-foamed plastics from serving as load-bearing elements in articles which must maintain strength and stiffness in bending during normal use.
It is familiar to those in the art to use extrusion blow molding to create lightweight hand-held articles, such as children's toys, such as hollow, plastic bats, golf clubs or any large, plastic article which benefits from being lighter in weight. While these articles can be both stiff and strong in bending, they also generally contain drawbacks which would limit their general use in semi-durable, Class-I medical devices, such as toothbrushes. First, such articles typically contain significant flash along parting lines, or in any locations where the parison is larger in cross sectional area than is the cavity to which it is blown. In these locations the parison folds within the cavity and substantial flash is created, even in the absence of cavity parting line. Second, most articles contain some significant vestige of blowing in the form of a hole, which may be accurately or inaccurately formed. Such a vestige would be regarded as a significant defect in a Class-I medical device which must prohibit breach or entry of contaminants to a hollow interior which may not drain effectively. Third, the relative size of these articles is large in comparison to the size of these defects, and the overall function of the articles is not severely affected by these defects. In many cases, the size of the article itself renders the manufacturing process easier, with respect to the minimization of defects. It is not challenging to extrusion blow mold articles, packages or bottles in the size range common to manual toothbrush handles—if the plastic wall thickness can be minimized in proportion to the overall cross section. Such articles exist in the form of small, typically squeezable, tubes or bottles which in fact benefit from having a very thin, deformable wall which enables dispensing of internal contents, making them unusable as toothbrushes.
Extrusion- and injection-blow-molded handles for semi-durable consumer goods such as feather dusters and tape dispensers are also known but again these articles would not meet criteria for semi-durable Class I medical devices, specifically with regard to the sealing of the necessary blowing orifice against intrusion of water or other contamination, and in the case of extrusion blow molding, in the appearance of flash on the articles in areas that would directly contact or go into the mouth. These articles are also generally very brittle and when too much force is applied often break or snap, producing sharp edges, making them unusable for use in the oral cavity.
It has also been proposed to manufacture manual toothbrushes by blow molding, and in fact it should not prove challenging to extrusion blow mold, injection blow mold, or even injection-stretch blow mold such an article in the general shape and size of a toothbrush or toothbrush handle, however no existing disclosure in the prior art addresses the issues of: Strength in bending, stiffness in bending, overall rigidity, mitigation of flash or other sharp defects, variations in cross-sectional area, and obstruction or sealing of the blow hole vestige. Any one of these defects in a blow molded toothbrush or toothbrush handle would severely affect the utility of the article, and as such, improvements are needed to enable a hollow article with material savings maximized by uniform wall thickness which is suitably strong and stiff in bending without breaking in use and does not leak or present uncomfortable defects to the user.
In view of these drawbacks of the prior art, it is an objective of the present invention to provide an improved toothbrush having an inner cavity, which avoids the drawbacks of the prior art.